Community Operational Research: Innovations, internationalization and agenda-setting applications

Johnson, Michael P.; Midgley, Gerald; Wright, Jason D.; Chichirau, George

doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2018.03.004

Cited by 28 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 84 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this regard, we agree with[43] that we need to raise the bar for publishing methodological contributions and always insist that their potential for impact is illustrated with real examples, not just hypotheticals. Ultimately, the demonstrated value of systems thinking to practice is important for take-up by newcomers and impact on management and policy making.…”

mentioning

confidence: 64%

The Four Waves of Systems Thinking

Cabrera,

Midgley

2023

Journal of Systems Thinking

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This Handbook is about the past, present, and future of systems thinking. It captures the history of systems thinking over its first three ‘waves,’ which are thought of as significant paradigmatic time periods in the history of the field. It then introduces a (possible) emerging fourth wave. Herein, we review the first three waves, as they have been written about in depth before, and dedicate more space to describing the fourth wave, as this is likely to be new to many readers. We cover all four waves as an entree to the many chapters, which were both recommended by an International Advisory Board (listed and thanked in the front material of this book), and written by esteemed invited authors. These chapters aptly describe the various frameworks that characterize the different waves; and notably include how those frameworks have continued to evolve since their origin.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 64%

The Four Waves of Systems Thinking

Cabrera,

Midgley

2023

Journal of Systems Thinking

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further, it is grounded in social research, feminist action research, and research justice frameworks (Israel et al, 2010;Jolivétte, 2015;Reid, 2004;Sandwick et al, 2018;Tinetti & Basch, 2013). CPAR builds trust by including representative members of the researched community in all stages of the research process (Black Women Scholars and the Research Working Group of the Black Mamas Matter Alliance, 2019; Demange et al, 2012;Israel et al, 1998;Phillips-Beck et al, 2019) and is thus well suited to explore the priorities of marginalized communities that have been underrepresented in research (Aldridge, 2016;Horowitz et al, 2009;Johnson et al, 2018;Turin et al, 2021), particularly those who are often referred to as "harder to reach populations," (Black Women Scholars and the Research Working Group of the Black Mamas Matter Alliance, 2019; Bonevski et al, 2014). Community members inform the design of the study and selection of measures and are active participants in data collection, interpretation, and dissemination of results (Horowitz et al, 2009).…”

Section: Community-based Participatory Action Research and Health Equitymentioning

confidence: 99%

The RESPCCT Study: Community-led Development of a Person-Centered Instrument to Measure Health Equity in Perinatal Services

Vedam,

Stoll,

Tarasoff

et al. 2024

Journal of Participatory Research Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While Canadian maternal mortality rates suggest widespread access to high-quality care, perinatal health care outcomes and care experiences among pregnant people in Canada vary widely, particularly among communities that have been historically oppressed, excluded, and marginalized. The lack of patient-oriented research and measurement in perinatal services led to the RESPCCT (Research Examining the Stories of Pregnancy and Childbirth in Canada Today) Study which used a community participatory action research (CPAR) approach to examine experiences of pregnancy and childbirth care. In this paper, we describe co-creation of a person-centered survey instrument that measures respect, disrespect and mistreatment during pregnancy-related care of individuals with diverse identities, backgrounds and circumstances. The study was co-led by a Community Steering Council alongside a multi-disciplinary group of researchers and clinicians, and pilot tested by service users from across Canada. The final survey instrument includes items that assess respectful care across 17 domains, including validated measures of autonomy, respect, mistreatment, trauma, and discrimination. It also captures information about respondents’ identities, backgrounds, circumstances, access to care, provider type, and outcomes. A total of 6096 individuals participated in the survey. We describe how we implemented CPAR best practices, strengths, challenges, and lessons learned for instrument development in reproductive justice research.

show abstract

“…In this paper, we describe the development of a systemic CEM evaluation methodology, and we investigate the extent to which the approach overcame various bottlenecks to the co-production and utilisation of evaluation findings in the context of a New Zealand regional council with statutory responsibilities for addressing various environmental issues. Bryant, 1994;Midgley & Ochoa-Arias, 2004;Johnson, Midgley, Wright & Chichirau, 2018) were used as part of an evaluation to generate a local evidence-base for the assessment of a CEM programme in Canterbury, New Zealand.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%